ArticleJournal of nephrology2025
A clinical audit of adverse post-nephrectomy outcomes in renal cell carcinoma patients at a tertiary hospital in Queensland, Australia.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a common malignancy, and nephrectomy is the mainstay of treatment for non-metastatic disease. The choice of surgery depends on the risks of oncologic recurrence, kidney function decline, and perioperative complications. This study aimed to identify factors associated with adverse post-operative outcomes in RCC patients undergoing nephrectomy at Townsville University Hospital (TUH).
methodsThis was a retrospective, quality assessment study of all adult patients undergoing either open or laparoscopic, partial, or radical nephrectomy for suspected RCC at TUH between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. Patients were identified from the Queensland Health Admitted Data Collection, with a median follow-up time of 39 months post-operatively.
resultsSixty patients were included; 71.7% underwent radical nephrectomy, and 63.3% were treated with a laparoscopic approach. Adverse kidney function outcomes were identified in 76.7% of patients. In the first 30 days post-nephrectomy, the reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in the radical nephrectomy group was more than double that in the partial nephrectomy group (p < 0.001). The rise in average serum creatinine post-radical nephrectomy was more than six times that post-partial nephrectomy (p = 0.001). This discrepancy in kidney function persisted up to three years post-operatively. No significant differences in RCC recurrence, post-operative cardiovascular events, or mortality were observed between partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy (p = 0.665, p = 1.00, p = 0.420).
conclusionsThe balance strongly favours partial nephrectomy despite its underutilisation for patients undergoing nephrectomy for suspected non-metastatic RCC at TUH. Urology teams should weigh the factors favouring radical nephrectomy against the risks of nearly universal renal function decline in this group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.